[XKAgustin]

A recent question came to my mind in another discussion in this forum and I thought it might be a good topic for discussion. Do you not believe that the Buddha’s views changed over time after his “awakening” ?

Whilst my knowledge of the Pali Canon does not allow me to have a fully informed view, my understanding has been that his
" enlightenment " allowed him to develop the concepts which he went on to develop teachings about - as such these were not views, and not what the Suttas predominately record, however did he express views and ideas as well ?

[Pmeidstc]

my opinion to the question is "yes"

his teachings changed, to reveal more, but his view was permanently established at enlightenment

for example, the suttas report the Buddha established Dependent Origination during his enlightenment (here)

however, the suttas also report the Buddha did not mention Dependent Origination (in full) during his 1st three sermons

regards

[goatteatromiag]

Thanks Element. It seems his teaching changed ( over time and to different individuals/groups ) rather than his understanding which was complete . I was thinking more about his views - for example on teaching to woman ( or teaching at all, in fact ). Or, to use the same example, is it that other factors which impacted on conditions changed rather than his view?

[tiereenny]

Greetings Andy,

Are you talking about views not connected to Right (and Wrong) View?

Metta,
Retro

[Elelaytet]

I'm with Element on this one. It looks like the central tenets of his teachings remained consistent throughout the suttas, with change coming in the means of expressing, explaining, exhorting, those same core tenets. The Vinaya rules he laid down changed many times, though.

He seems to have been against starting a bhikkuni line, but was convinced to change his mind by others.

[Adfcvkdg]

Greetings Andy,

Are you talking about views not connected to Right (and Wrong) View?

Metta,
Retro

Hi Retro,

Yes, I am - I am not referring to intrinsic matters of dhamma.

Given that his life would still have been a conditioned process of the five aggregates and his cognition would have continued on he may have developed different views on many aspects of experience over time, and I am asking about records of this in the Suttas.
Or is it that after " awakening " he became in a different type of “ mental state ” : where he had an unconditioned reality - but then this would suggest a different type of consciousness, would it not ?

I am a simple Aussie woman, thanks for entertaining my question - hope I am explaining it adequately.

[casinobonusa]

Hi Andy,

Could I just clarify that you are refering to the Pali Canon in particular, rather than including the later Mahayana sutras ?

I think its worth pointing this out now to avoid possible confusion later.

with metta,

Aloka

[WenPyclenoWex]

Hi Aloka- D, yes the Pali Canon in particular, thanks everyone for your help :hug:

[IrrettelatWet]

I was thinking more about his views - for example on teaching to woman ( or teaching at all, in fact ).

the suttas state, at this enlightenment, the Buddha resolved to establish the four-fold Sangha

42. "There was a time, Ananda, when I dwelt at Uruvela, on the bank of the Nerañjara River, at the foot of the goatherds' banyan-tree, soon after my supreme Enlightenment. And Mara, the Evil One, approached me, saying: 'Now, O Lord, let the Blessed One come to his final passing away! Let the Happy One utterly pass away! The time has come for the Parinibbana of the Lord.'

43. "Then, Ananda, I answered Mara, the Evil One, saying: 'I shall not come to my final passing away, Evil One, until my bhikkhus and bhikkhunis, laymen and laywomen, have come to be true disciples — wise, well disciplined, apt and learned, preservers of the Dhamma, living according to the Dhamma, abiding by appropriate conduct and, having learned the Master's word, are able to expound it, preach it, proclaim it, establish it, reveal it, explain it in detail, and make it clear; until, when adverse opinions arise, they shall be able to refute them thoroughly and well, and to preach this convincing and liberating Dhamma.

Maha-parinibbana Sutta

[leacturavar]

I was thinking more about his views - for example on teaching to woman ( or teaching at all, in fact ).

after his enlightenment, the suttas report the Buddha resolved to not teach...however, commentators say the Buddha only did this so the character of the Buddha-Dhamma would be established, which is to only teach when requested...

'Enough now with teaching
what
only with difficulty
I reached.
This Dhamma is not easily realized
by those overcome
with aversion & passion.

What is abstruse, subtle,
deep,
hard to see,
going against the flow —
those delighting in passion,
cloaked in the mass of darkness,
won't see.'

"As I reflected thus, my mind inclined to dwelling at ease, not to teaching the Dhamma.

"Then Brahma Sahampati, having known with his own awareness the line of thinking in my awareness, thought: 'The world is lost! The world is destroyed! The mind of the Tathagata, the Arahant, the Rightly Self-awakened One inclines to dwelling at ease, not to teaching the Dhamma!' Then, just as a strong man might extend his flexed arm or flex his extended arm, Brahma Sahampati disappeared from the Brahma-world and reappeared in front of me. Arranging his upper robe over one shoulder, he knelt down with his right knee on the ground, saluted me with his hands before his heart, and said to me: 'Lord, let the Blessed One teach the Dhamma! Let the One-Well-Gone teach the Dhamma! There are beings with little dust in their eyes who are falling away because they do not hear the Dhamma. There will be those who will understand the Dhamma.'

MN 26

[dolaBeetCeage]

This is very interesting to me - it suggests that Lord Buddha's intent and understanding was always that he would teach and that it would be understood and carried on - maybe it is that rather than his views, as well as his methods of teaching, changed it was more a pragmatic point - that he knew that at times any attempts to teach Dhamma, to women and otherwise, would not be effective?

[flowersnewacq]

Whilst he had the ability to change his views and in that sense they were not permanent, his insight and ability to understand the truth, meant that there was no need to change his views.

[Obsententicab]

Whilst he had the ability to change his views and in that sense they were not permanent, his insight and ability to understand the truth, meant that there was no need to change his views.

Ordinary beings operating from conditioned existence continually have different views/opinions about this and that ...but does a Buddha actually have changing personal views/opinions about dhamma ? I would imagine not.

Personally I don't think that adapting teachings to suit the capacity of the listener would come under a heading of views and opinions.

[casinobonuswer]

I agree, and just to clarify, I have not been suggesting that adapting teachings comes under the same heading as having different views - I think I have clearly identified that I see they are two different things.

[hs6KnlcW]

I agree, and just to clarify, I have not been suggesting that adapting teachings comes under the same heading as having different views - I think I have clearly identified that I see they are two different things.

Oh I wasn't implying that you were, Andy !

[Doctorpills]

Thanks again everyone.

[Gymnfacymoota]

Hi Andy,

Views are about wrong believes, opinions or concepts -"ditthi"- as when one holds the idea of a self -"atta-ditthi". So it is imposible that Buddha could have views as holding believes or opinions but just the Noble or Right View. His doctrine is not based on speculative opinions but on the understanding of the source of suffering and its cessation. What happend during his long period of being a Noble Teacher is just that he adapted the teaching of awakening to particular case while developing for some very deep and subtle teachings and for others some that were not so because it seems there is a kind of mundane and supramundane Right View. But even that, if we pay attention, all the discourses are instructions so to abandone views and to shift them into the Right or Noble one; all of them ending in the final result of following them which is awakening.

MN9 can be a good example for this. He offers different ways of developing awareness and to abandon views, which indeed, known as "ditthi" and not having an indication of Noble -"samma"- is considered in most of the cases about holding a wrong one.

"When a noble disciple has thus understood the [unwholesome, nutriment, suffering, etc.], the root of the unwholesome, the wholesome, and the root of the wholesome, he entirely abandons the underlying tendency to lust, he abolishes the underlying tendency to aversion, he extirpates the underlying tendency to the view and conceit 'I am,' and by abandoning ignorance and arousing true knowledge he here and now makes an end of suffering. In that way too a noble disciple is one of right view, whose view is straight, who has perfect confidence in the Dhamma and has arrived at this true Dhamma."

Sammaditthi Sutta
So the only view the Buddha taught was the Right or Noble View exposed in different set of instructions suitable to particular cases.

[Piediahef]

Interestingly, I've just found a recent post from Ajahn Sujato in his blog (Sujato's Blog), which is entitled "Are the Buddha's Views Permanent"

http://sujato.wordpress.com/


.

[DavidShreder]

Thanks Aloka,

From the link you gave:

"What is likely to have happened is that the Buddha changed the way he taught. This would be quite appropriate given the rapid change and development of his following over the years. In the early times there was a small group of dedicated, attained followers, while in later years you had many less dedicated, less intelligent followers. In addition the seniors had already learnt the basics thoroughly and wanted more detailed teachings (e.g. the Mahanidana Sutta); and there was increasing specialisation in different areas like Vinaya, systematic analysis (proto-Abhidhamma), or lay teaching.

Sujato's Blog

If Buddha wasn't awake, if he was not a Tataghata, he could never give the adequate teaching to the adequate person or group of people. That he could is an indication of his realized enlightenment. He taught for many years... so the chance to meet different situations was at hand. Being enlightened and holding just one and only one sort of view -Sammaditthi- is why he could accomplish such endeavour.

So to sum all this up, I think we can speak of the Awakened experience as “permanent” in a at least couple of senses. It is “permanent” in the sense that there is a permanent cessation of greed, hatred, and delusion. And it is “permanent” in the sense that it forms a view of reality that is essentially correct and does not need to change over time.

Sujato's Blog
Agree.

This is a difficult question in Buddhist philosophy, which has been raised and discussed many times over the years. I hope this little post helps makes things a little clearer

Sujato's Blog
Maybe because I am not skilled in philosophical entanglements I don't see the difficult to address what the teachings of Buddha are about:

"What I have revealed is: 'This is Suffering, this is the Arising of Suffering, this is the Cessation of Suffering, and this is the Path that leads to the Cessation of Suffering.' And why, monks, have I revealed it?

"Because this is related to the goal, fundamental to the holy life, conduces to disenchantment, dispassion, cessation, tranquillity, higher knowledge, enlightenment and Nibbaana, therefore I have revealed it.

"Therefore, monks, your task is to learn: 'This is Suffering, this is the Arising of Suffering, this is the Cessation of Suffering, this is the Path that leads to the Cessation of Suffering.' That is your task."

Simsapa Sutta
Maybe the Simsapa Sutta seems simple but is the great reminder, the compass about what the Buddha taught and for its realization the unique view is the Noble one.

[CealialactBek]

"What is likely to have happened is that the Buddha changed the way he taught. This would be quite appropriate given the rapid change and development of his following over the years. In the early times there was a small group of dedicated, attained followers, while in later years you had many less dedicated, less intelligent followers. In addition the seniors had already learnt the basics thoroughly and wanted more detailed teachings (e.g. the Mahanidana Sutta); and there was increasing specialisation in different areas like Vinaya, systematic analysis (proto-Abhidhamma), or lay teaching.

Sujato's Blog

personally, i do not regard the Mahanidana Sutta as a more detailed teaching. further, i doubt the Buddha actually spoke it because the Mahanidana Sutta simply does not conform with the rest of the suttas about Dependent Origination and therefore must be rejected as Buddhavaca following the Great Standards

many scholars consider that much of the Digha Nikaya, which includes the Mahanidana Sutta, was not spoken by the Buddha

regards